Question #1: Dr. Dagenais’ lecture from October 26th Demonstrate that contemporary suicide offers itself to be understood as a social phenomenon. Your demonstration must rely on the features presented in class.

Buy here:
http://student.land/question-1-dr-dagenais-<strong>lecture</strong>-<strong>from</strong>-o
c<strong>to</strong><strong>be</strong>r-<strong>26th</strong>-demonstrate-<strong>that</strong>-<strong>contemporary</strong>-<strong>suicide</strong>-offe
rs-<strong>itself</strong>-<strong>to</strong>-<strong>be</strong>-unders<strong>to</strong>od-<strong>as</strong>-a-<strong>social</strong>-<strong>phenomenon</strong>-your
-<strong>demonstration</strong>-<strong>must</strong>-<strong>rely</strong>-on-the-features-presented-in-c
l<strong>as</strong>s/
<strong>Question</strong> <strong>#1</strong>: <strong>Dr</strong>. <strong>Dagenais’</strong> <strong>lecture</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>Oc<strong>to</strong><strong>be</strong>r</strong> 26​ th
<strong>Demonstrate</strong> <strong>that</strong> <strong>contemporary</strong> <strong>suicide</strong> <strong>offers</strong> <strong>itself</strong> <strong>to</strong> <strong>be</strong> unders<strong>to</strong>od <strong>as</strong> a
<strong>social</strong> <strong>phenomenon</strong>. <strong>Your</strong> <strong>demonstration</strong> <strong>must</strong> <strong>rely</strong> on the features presented
in cl<strong>as</strong>s.
· How <strong>to</strong> prepare for this?
- Note all the key features in the interpretation of <strong>contemporary</strong> <strong>suicide</strong>
- Do not refer <strong>to</strong> all the features, but select a few <strong>to</strong> make your argument
- In the same way, a list of features with a one line statement on the <strong>social</strong>
character is not sufficient.
- Pay close attention <strong>to</strong> the question. It does not <strong>as</strong>k WHY there is such a
thing, but rather it <strong>as</strong>ks about the NATURE of the <strong>phenomenon</strong> (key word:
<strong>social</strong>)
- It is not necessary <strong>to</strong> bring in Durkheim

<strong>Question</strong> #2: <strong>Dr</strong>. Best’s <strong>lecture</strong> <strong>from</strong> Novem<strong>be</strong>r 2​ nd
Descri<strong>be</strong> one or more of the ways in which, according <strong>to</strong> Marx, the capitalist
application of machinery in production inverts the potential of machinery (or
<strong>contemporary</strong> technical innovations) <strong>to</strong> make work e<strong>as</strong>ier for people.
· How <strong>to</strong> prepare for this?
- Re-read the <strong>as</strong>signed excerpts <strong>from</strong> Capital
- Note <strong>that</strong> you are <strong>as</strong>ked <strong>to</strong> descri<strong>be</strong> one OR MORE ways
- (key words: capitalist application of machinery – in other words, do not focus
solely on machinery or capitalism, but explain how these relate <strong>to</strong> each other)
- Extra Hint: I am looking for the objective re<strong>as</strong>ons why machinery, under
capitalism, results in poor living conditions for the worker
<strong>Question</strong> #3: <strong>Dr</strong>. Ikeda’s <strong>lecture</strong> <strong>from</strong> Novem<strong>be</strong>r 9​ th
In the Great Transformation, Karl Polanyi is deconstructing the li<strong>be</strong>ral
argument according <strong>to</strong> which market economies are the au<strong>to</strong>matic outgrowth
of the natural propensity of individuals <strong>to</strong> do commerce. Polanyi puts forward
two arguments:
1. He stresses the existence of non-market ‘economies’
2. He emph<strong>as</strong>izes <strong>that</strong> the modern national (or internal) markets actually found
their origins in the world trade.

Resume the first <strong>as</strong>pect of Polanyi’s argument in order <strong>to</strong> explain this
perspective.
· How <strong>to</strong> prepare for this?
- Note – answer the question by referring only <strong>to</strong> the first point (existence of
non-market economies)
- Be careful: it is not sufficient <strong>to</strong> copy out your reading report
- Use the examples given in the text
- I am looking for some pretty specific key concepts <strong>that</strong> had <strong>be</strong>en emph<strong>as</strong>ized
in cl<strong>as</strong>s but come directly <strong>from</strong> the text
- Extra hint: An essential part of answering the question is <strong>to</strong> refer <strong>to</strong> and
explain the li<strong>be</strong>ral argument <strong>that</strong> he deconstructs (READ: cl<strong>as</strong>sical theory…the
argument is in the question <strong>itself</strong>)
<strong>Question</strong> #4: <strong>Dr</strong>. Lafrance’s <strong>lecture</strong> <strong>from</strong> Novem<strong>be</strong>r 16​ th
Identify and discuss one major development in modern society <strong>that</strong> h<strong>as</strong>
contributed <strong>to</strong> making the body a relevant object of <strong>contemporary</strong> sociological
analysis.
· How <strong>to</strong> prepare for this?
- Re-read articles – the Chris Schilling one may <strong>be</strong> helpful

- There have <strong>be</strong>en several but do note <strong>that</strong> you are <strong>to</strong> identify and discuss ONE
major development (while some are tied <strong>to</strong> each other, you are not <strong>to</strong> identify
every single one)
- Be specific in drawing a link <strong>be</strong>tween the development and its direct
contribution <strong>to</strong> making the body a relevant object of analysis (details)
- Extra Hint: In constructing your argument it may <strong>be</strong> helpful <strong>to</strong> refer <strong>to</strong> how
the body w<strong>as</strong> discussed prior <strong>to</strong> this major development